Re: the coherence of god - omnipotence #47 by iizo » mar 15, 2010 8:23 pm this is crazy ,omnipotence as a claim of possibility is vacuous in a deterministic world ,there is nothing that could happen there is only what do happen the term is meaningless. The omnipotence paradox is a family of semantic paradoxes that explores what is meant by 'omnipotence' if an omnipotent being is able to perform any action, then it should be able to create a task that it is unable to perform. Abstract in atheism: a philosophical justification, michael martin argues that to posit a god that is both omnipotent and omniscient is philosophically incoherenti challenge this argument by proposing that a god who is necessarily omniscient is more powerful than a god who is contingently omniscient.
To insist that the omnipotence paradox disproves god is to fail to understand what it means to be god on another note, using incorrect definitions is a fallible way to argue against god if you define good as a pink unicorn then i would be forced to admit that god is not good — god is not a pink unicorn. Omnipotence the claim that god is omnipotent is the claim that god has unlimited power to perform basic actions while there is no strict logical incoherence in postulating the existence of such a being (the description a being with unlimited power does not involve a contradiction in the way that square circle does) it is sometimes claimed that omnipotence is broadly incoherent on two grounds. Now, dr manhattan was once human and god wasn't, but the really big theological problem that we have as a species is that we want to have our cake and eat it too: we want a god that is cuddly, human, a big dude with a beard or a big elephant or something but we want that god to have abilities beyond us. Making a stone that cannot be lifted by an omnipotent being is only a contradiction if omnipotence is a coherent concept the purpose of the paradox is to determine whether or not the concept is coherent.
Although from what we have said about the restrictions that any coherent account of god's power must place on this power, a better term for god's power than 'omnipotence' would be 'maxipotence. But is the notion of god's omnipotence a coherent idea in order to be able to dissect this question we must have an understanding of the true nature of omnipotence, which is in itself interpreted in many different ways. Mackie agrees that the problem for the theologian can be solved by giving up one of the three principles with which we began: we can deny that god is omnipotent or all good, or we can deny that there is any evil in the world. Mackie proposes that there are five adequate solutions, which are as follows: 1) god is not wholly good, or 2) not quite omnipotent, or that 3) evil does not exist, or that 4) good is not opposed to the kind of evil that exists, or that 5) there are limits to what an omnipotent thing can do (same as 3. You need the theology so you can fit the glimpses into a coherent framework but if all you have is a framework, you might as well give up and go home the key insight here is that god is much, much more than we understand.
God is said to be omnipotent, omniscient, eternal, all good, omnipresent, and so forth but to many it is not at all clear how these divine attributes can either be proven as real or, more importantly, how they make any sense or can co-exist in one and the same entity or in relation to the world around us. If god were omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, then evil would not exist the concept of the god of classical theism is incoherent because within the attributes of god contradict each other and they also contradict our experience of the universe. A coherent definition of a god - can god do everything - clearing-up contradictions about jehovah in genesis - consider god's creation—think about god's greatness - does god alone possess immortality.
Omnipotence is one of the key attributes that god must possess in order for the idea of god to be coherent but can god do the logically impossible for example can god make 1+1=3. Omnipotence omnipotence and the stone paradox can god create a stone that he can't lift it if he can, then he will not be able to lift the. Thus, if it is sufficient for a creature to qualify as god that it should be because of it that the universe and everything within it came to be, it is perfectly possible that god should not be omnipotent, and, thus, perfectly possible that god and evil should co-exist.
Is the concept of god coherent and intelligible if i am to seek a true answer here, i must first ask whether or not the concept of god is coherent and intelligible in accordance to what we, as a populous, know to be real and true - and then, in accordance to that which we as a populous define as being sensible, and possible. The problem of evil can be defined theoretically as the apparent inconsistency between, on the one hand, belief in the existence of a perfectly good and omnipotent god and, on the other hand, the existence of evil this book discusses four different solutions to this problem, provided by richard. Now, suppose a and b are logically coherent but mutually incompatible states of affairs god, being omnipotent, can bring about either one suppose that in fact he wills to bring about a rather than b being omniscient, he knows that a rather than b is what he wills to bring about.
Omnipotent god - biblical examples god is omnipotent in creation isaiah 44:24 - this is what the lord says—your redeemer, who formed you in the womb: i am the lord, the maker of all things, who stretches out the heavens, who spreads out the earth by myself. Hello poetry is a poetry community that raises money by advertising to passing readers like yourself if you're into poetry and meeting other poets, join us to remove ads and share your poetry. Likewise, god cannot stand before a podium and shout i am not omnipotent because that would produce a contradiction as well omnipotence is an inherent part of god's nature, so therefore it doesn't have to go on the list of things god can do bam problem solved.